Role of blend phase ratio in controlling morphology, compressive, and recovery behavior of low‐density polyethylene/ethylene‐vinyl acetate foams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work presents a detailed study on the influence of blend phase ratio upon the morphology, crystallinity, mechanical and viscoelastic properties of cross‐linked foams based on blends of low‐density polyethylene (LDPE) and ethylene‐vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA). Non‐isothermal foaming is carried out via melt compression molding using dicumyl peroxide and azodicarbonamide as crosslinking and foaming agents, respectively. Rheo‐mechanical spectrometer characterization reveals faster crosslinking for EVA, leading to higher rate of melt viscosity increase for EVA‐rich blends during heating. This results in the formation of foams with higher cell density and gel content than LDPE‐rich foams. Compressive stress–strain behavior and viscoelastic hysteresis of the LDPE‐rich foams are governed by the degree of crystallinity and cell density, whereas for the EVA‐rich foams cell density and gel content are dominant. Increasing the crosslink density results in enhanced compressive behavior with excellent recovery of stress to 60% strain during four compression cycles.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".